In Sunday’s op-ed for the New York Times, columnist Frank Bruni takes up issue with Bill and Hillary Clinton and their role in passing the Defense of Marriage act in 1996 during Clinton’s presidency.
The Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman only, and bars same-sex couples from receiving the same benefits that a heterosexual couple can receive through marriage.
Not surprisingly, DOMA has come under legal attack. Several court cases, Bruni points out, have ruled that it contradicts the Constitution’s equal-protection clause. The Supreme Court is in the midst of deciding which plan of action to take, but Bruni hopes that they will end up dismantling it altogether.
DOMA has a renewed sense of controversy with the current debate about same-sex marriage and whether or not it should be legalized in the United States. President Obama made history earlier this year when he was the first president ever to publically step out and say that he supports same-sex marriage. Still, DOMA exists.
Columnist Bruni takes up that issue with the Clintons, who are at the helm of the Democratic Party, saying that they should be taking a more active role regarding the same-sex marriage debate. With Obama’s clear support for it earlier this year, same-sex marriage is no longer an issue that can be skirted around.
Rumors are swirling about Hillary Clinton making a run for the presidential bid in 2016, especially with her stepping down from her role as Secretary of State this year. Bruni writes, “It’s past time, and it’s almost time for Hillary, who is about to step down as secretary of state, to catch up with other cabinet members and President Obama and make her presumed support for same-sex marriage explicit, which she has never done.”
Bruni goes on to say that it is a “shame” that both Hillary and Bill have “been on the sidelines” on this hot topic in recent times. Their influence is undeniable and powerful, says Bruni.
“What a shame, given that no two people have been larger in the Democratic Party over the last quarter-century and given the party’s deserved pride in its embrace of same-sex marriage now. The two of you should be a more integral part of that pride. You should be at the very epicenter of this. It’s strange and it’s sad that you’re not.”
Bruni does, however, point out that in 2009 Bill Clinton “said that DOMA should be wiped off the books and you endorsed same-sex marriage, getting out ahead of many Democrats who still had elections to worry about and weren’t yet seeing, in polls, as much public support for same-sex marriage as they wanted to see.”
However, it’s Clinton’s followup that frustrates Bruni. “But your comments since then have been sparse and succinct: no more than a written statement in favor of the 2011 bill to legalize same-sex marriage in New York, your home since you left the White House, and a recorded phone message urging North Carolinians last spring not to adopt a ban on same-sex marriage in their state Constitution, which they did anyway."
Bruni goes on to point out that not every leader can tackle every single issue, but the same-sex marriage debate is coming to a point, if not surpassed it, that it cannot be ignored.
In conclusion, Bruni writes, “What I and many others want most from you isn’t really an apology. It’s full membership — and, better yet, leadership — in a movement that’s headed inexorably in the right direction, with or without you.”
What do you think about the Clintons' handling of the same-sex marriage debate? Should they take on a more active role? Should Bill Clinton apologize for passing DOMA in 1996?
28 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.Madeliene | Jan 04, 2013, 11:48 AM EST
Bigots? Clintons vote which ever way the wind is blowng on thier backs! Liar and a Traitoer, good Piair!
olovely | Dec 06, 2012, 08:35 AM EST
eiriamach is on the money about you anglo-norman. bigots don't get to complain they're being called bigots. that's how it works, see?
anglo-norman | Dec 05, 2012, 03:59 PM EST
eiriamach- your getting carried away with yourself son.
Smyrnian | Dec 05, 2012, 01:23 PM EST
The level of discourse on the site is truly abysmal!
eiriamach | Dec 05, 2012, 10:08 AM EST
anglo-norman thinks he/she has to "call for genocide" before deserving the label "bigot"?? No, just calling for discrimination against gays and lesbians under civil law (concerning marriage) is sufficient. Just like the organized ultra-conservative Catholic Defenders, anglo-norman thinks we are stupid enough to believe that they can lobby against equal rights and still believe in the equal worth of the people they try to deprive of equal rights. Don't be ridiculous: if you really believe gays and lesbians are equal to everyone else in the eyes of God and your eyes, then you'll advocate their equal treatment under the law-- the LAW-- no one is calling for your Church to provide wedding ceremonies for them. You can protest as much as you like that you're not a bigot, but your words say otherwise, and we all have equal freedom of speech to point that out. I'd like to know: where are the Defenders of Catholic "doctrine" (about all of us being equally sons and daughters of God)? Why aren't THEY correcting the heterosexism in norman's, kaydog's, mairint's, and reynelda's words? Isn't it a sin, like all bigotry?
Seanmor | Dec 05, 2012, 09:30 AM EST
The name of marriage bill that President Clinton signed is somewhat misleading. DOMA should have been DONMA (Defence of Natural Marriage Act) betweeen one man and one woman. The family is the cornerstone of any society, and such family consists of parents and their children, not homosexual couples of any partnerships.
olovely | Dec 04, 2012, 08:52 PM EST
Stop whining kaydog1, no one's buying your nonsense. You can disagree with legal equality for gays but you can be accurately described as an irrational bigot for doing so. If you don't like being named and shamed don't needlessly and pointlessly discriminate.
kaydog1 | Dec 04, 2012, 07:10 PM EST
Norman, don't you know that anyone who doesn't agree with the "Liberals" is automatically a 'bigot' and a 'homophobe'? I'm actually rather surprised that they didn't also paint you as a 'racist', as well. Libs will NOT tolerate anyone who does not agree with them.
anglo-norman | Dec 04, 2012, 05:07 PM EST
I an only expressing my right of specch on these issues. I am not calling for a genocide of Gay people. I was called a bigot for being honest in my opinion which was wrong. I wish Gay people all the best in life but I disagree with Gay marriage & adoption as is my right.
anglo-norman | Dec 04, 2012, 04:48 PM EST
You're free to express irrational animus against gay people (divinely inspired or not) but you can't do it and then complain you're being called a bigot, anglo-norman. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with deciding to hate or disparage other people for no rational reason.
anglo-norman | Dec 04, 2012, 04:26 PM EST
Eschetic- I am not religious as surely my earlier posts would have made that clear to you. I am not a bigot for stating my opinion on Gay marriage & Adoption. It is called freedom of speech.
Eschetic | Dec 04, 2012, 11:06 AM EST
hollabackgurl may BE "sad," but she speaks simple sensible truth. anglo-norman merely spouts extremely sad, not to mention dated bigoty - even if based in his own sincere religious superstition, it is not supported by ANY reputable studies of the needs of a stable society or child welfare in a diverse society.
anglo-norman | Dec 03, 2012, 10:35 PM EST
hollabackgurl- SAD
hollabackgurl | Dec 03, 2012, 09:48 PM EST
I don't believe that bigots should marry or adopt children, since they're going to do more harm than gay or straight couples.
anglo-norman | Dec 03, 2012, 09:10 PM EST
I don't believe people of the same sex should marry or adopt children.
hollabackgurl | Dec 03, 2012, 08:28 PM EST
It's tiresome to dismantle the half-baked arguments of bigots like Mairint (who only ever comments on gay issues and abortion, because she's a fundamentalist). Homosexuality is EVERYWHERE in nature, perforce it is by no means unnatural. A thing is not so because she says it's so. God made gay people, and He made millions of them, and He'll make millions more, which convinces me He's fine with it and Mairint is really the unnatural one.
Eschetic | Dec 03, 2012, 06:24 PM EST
Unlike "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which was simply a craven collapse - even those of us who view the DOMA as the last gasp of bigots (Dumb Old Muddled A**s) who refuse to recognize that marriage equality was successfully litigated over 40 years ago with Loving vs. Virginia might cut the Clintons a little slack. It was almost 20 years ago, the Clintons were southern politicians (a major reason I will not support a pol from the old Confederacy for the foreseeable future), and we had not educated them that this is NOT an issue having ANYTHING to do with religion. Marriage Equality (NOT "Gay Marriage") has to do with CIVIL marriage and the equality of all citizens before the law for the greater stability of society. The right wing, of course, want to destabilize "non-traditional" relationships to fit their per-conceptions and spread AIDS, but the country and the new generation have both moved beyond them. What Bill Clinton mistakenly thought he had to do THEN and what he or Hillary WOULD do now are two different things and those who don't want to roll back the clock to the bad old Nixon/Reagan/"W" Days, need to focus on where we are now!
mairint | Dec 03, 2012, 05:51 PM EST
Bruni obviously is on the one track tack - as if homosexuals cannot have 'benefits' -rubbish. Anyone can make a contract and inherit from each other etc., same gender folk have more benefits that married couples in all sorts of ways. The demand for 'marriage' is just that they want everything to be the same when it cannot. It is physically impossible. Their demand is against nature itself. A Mom and Dad is the natural and best for every child and it is this that decides. Children are a gift in the marital loving relationship between a husband and wife. Children deserve the best. They are not a market commodity to be messed about with. Marriage is not the property of any government to play with. It has been around since long before governments came in to existence. No one will ever change that reality, even if words are changed. In the same gender market it is "I want, I want..." In natural marriage there is give, give, all the time and in this way the spouses receive...
Renelda M. | Dec 03, 2012, 04:44 PM EST
The only saving grace for Hillary Clinton is to stand with theDOMA and against same-sex marriage. Please let there be one politician with guts, and ideals and scruples. But, alas. I fear Hillary has beocme too tough and seasoned a politician to have those aforementioned qulaties. She's too busy being one of the boys. Staying in an immoral marriage doesn't help her image or send forth a philosophy of scruples anad ideals. Being SOS brought out the real Hillary. No thanks for President. She's too, way too. political.
alisaann | Dec 03, 2012, 04:23 PM EST
i AGREE, it was a HUGE mistake for bill clinton to sign DOMA into law, just as it was a HUGE MISTAKE for him to have signed DADT into law...and he DID support the REPEAL of DADT...and if it's TRUE, he feels that DOMA should be WIPED from the books....then GREAT.....while i like the clintons, i haven't always AGREED with some things they've done. alisa
irishpjk | Dec 03, 2012, 04:11 PM EST
wtf. Who believes Bill Clinton ever took the word marriage seriously? I guess maybe a fool or two here and there did.
feeneycj | Dec 03, 2012, 02:46 PM EST
I agree with the previous comment. The Bible is not the Declaration of Independence.
hollabackgurl | Dec 03, 2012, 11:15 AM EST
'Tracy' you don't have any gay 'friends.' You oppose their right to form legal unions with all the rights and entitlements of marriage. That's not a 'belief' by the way, that's irrational bigotry.
misneac | Dec 03, 2012, 10:26 AM EST
An amazing presumption by the likes of "hollabackgurl " and others that the American Constitution has the same standing and authority as the Bible ,and all the accepted standards of natural law ! There is no such entity as same-sex "marriage " ,and the gays and their supporters should shut up and obey the law !
Tracy | Dec 03, 2012, 10:25 AM EST
Opposing same sex marriage is not synonymous with opposing gay rights. You assume incorrectly "hollabackgurl" . I have many good friends who are gay. Don't jump to conclusions just because someone doesn't share your beliefs. I don't believe Clinton was wrong to sign DOMA, and if he chooses to remain silent on the subject that is his choice. I stand by my comment as it is the truth.
hollabackgurl | Dec 03, 2012, 09:45 AM EST
I'm not sure if you participated in the recent general election 'Tracy' but you failed to notice that in every state that put gay marriage equality to the ballot they succeeded in securing victory for gay rights. I don't know why you're 'against' permitting equality to gay people since it's obvious they are entirely absent from your life. Clinton was wrong to sign DOMA and DADT and he must act to right those historic wrongs now.
Tracy | Dec 03, 2012, 09:39 AM EST
I absolutely disagree with Bruni. As a Catholic Democrat from NY, I am against same sex marriage, as are many in the party. This legislation was pushed through and made law by Cuomo and as the recent election proved, go against your constituents and you will not be re-elected. As in the case of senator McDonald.
handsome68 | Dec 03, 2012, 08:19 AM EST
Many of youse liberal omadhauns don't seem to realize that the Bible is not, e.g., the American Declaration of Independence, with amendments to the latter.